The Personal Injury Blog feed

Salmonella wedding tragedy - Leading Personal Injury Lawyer Clare Campbell of Pannone LLP comments

2010-09-01 00:00:00

The Manchester Evening news and other media have today reported the tragic story of how a wedding guest died and others were taken ill following a meal at a synagogue in Prestwich, Manchester. The article can be read in full here.

Leading Personal Injury Lawyer Clare Campbell of Pannone LLP is acting on behalf of many of the guests and their families. A full investigation is under way.

If you have suffered from sickness or food poisoning in similar circumstances, either in the UK or abroad, then call our specialist litigation solicitors for immediate advice.

Call our litigation solicitors on 0800 0384 384 during business hours and a specialist accident, illness or sickness claim solicitor can review your compensation claim for free while you are on the phone. If you prefer you can contact us by e-mail

Dangerous Dogs - Yet Another Child Injured by Dogs

2010-08-31 00:00:00

It is terrible to read of yet another incident involving a child being injured by dogs in todays press.

All too often in this department we encounter claims involving dog bites, although fortunately rarely as severe as the injuries poor little Rhianna has suffered from. However there have been several similar high profile incidents involving children suffering from catastrophic, even fatal, injuries in recent years. Heartbreakingly a baby died in February 2009 as did a 4 year old boy in November 2009, and there have been many other reported cases in recent years with other unfortunate children.

The law as it currently stands relating to dog bites is encapsulated in the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 which states that it is an offence if certain breeds of fighting dogs are bred, sold or exchanged, allowed to stray or unmuzzled in public places. In addition it imposes liability upon the owner of any breed of dog which behaves dangerously in a public place. The Animals Act 1971 also provides that the keeper of an animal is liable for any damage it causes, if he/she knows it was likely to cause such damage or injury unrestrained.

The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 however does not cover incidents when a breed which is not specifically prohibited attacks a person on private land such as in the home or garden. There has been growing concern about the increasing number of dog attacks on private property which has been blamed on the trend for some members of the public to own dogs bred to look like fighting dogs, usually Staffordshire bull terrier crosses, also Rottweilers such as were involved in the incident involving Rhianna. This is reflected in recent statistics which show that in 1998 there were 764 prosecutions of dog owners and 406 convictions. These figures rose in 2008 to 1247 prosecutions and 889 convictions.

The issue of compulsory dog insurance to cover incidents which occur on private land has of course been in the news earlier in the year. In March 2010 the previous Labour Government gave consideration to this issue which was widely opposed by the Conservatives, the public and the Insurance Industry. The Conservatives stated that the Labour Government were seeking to tax all dog owners and Nick Starling of the Association of British Insurers added: "While we understand the desire to reduce the number of attacks by dogs, making insurance compulsory for all dog owners is much more difficult than it looks. He commented that Insurers may be reluctant to offer high risk cover. Within a week however the proposals for compulsory insurance were withdrawn with the then Government stated that only pets which caused problems should be targeted.

With the change of Government has come no increased certainty and within the last few weeks a coalition of Animal Welfare organisations sent a message to the Prime Minister to stating: "We believe that irresponsible dog ownership, whether it is allowing dogs to stray, be dangerously out of control or indiscriminately breeding them, causes significant problems for the safety and welfare of both humans and animals. Current legislation is proving inadequate in many cases to ensure sufficient protection."

As a Personal Injury lawyer (and admittedly non-dog owner) who sometimes has to tell the victim of a dog bite injury that there is no point in pursuing a claim because the dog owner was uninsured and without assets, I believe it could only be beneficial for future victims to have compulsory insurance enforced, even though the vast majority of dog owners are responsible and ensure their dogs do not cause injury.

However far more preferable would be if the minority of dog owners who do not keep their dogs under control could consider how they would feel if their dog was responsible for causing an injury such as that suffered by Rhianna, and ensure that such an accident does not happen in the future. A good starting place may be to read this Defra leaflet.

If you or a member of your family has suffered an accident or injury call our specialist personal injury solicitors on 0800 0384 384 during business hours and a specialist personal injury lawyer can review your compensation claim for free while you are on the phone.

Former soldier wins his PTSD compensation battle

2010-08-31 00:00:00

I was pleased to read in the press this week that a former bomb disposal has suceeded in his claim against the Ministry of Defence, as they failed to properly diagnose and treat PTSD he developed after active service including in the Gulf, Northern Ireland and Sierra Leone.

He argued that despite showing symptoms and receiving psychiatric assessment in the late 1990's he was not formally diagnosed with PTSD until 2004, and therefore this left him vulnerable and without the treatment he needed. He sadly went on to suffer a breakdown and lost his military career. I understand his case was settled by the MOD.

Pannone LLP acted for Malcolm New, a former colour sergeant in the Royal Welch Fusiliers, who was the first serviceman to suceed in a claim for compensation in these cirucmstances following a group action in 2003. Mr New received 620,000.00 in damages for the MoDs negligent failure to diagnose and treat his PTSD. The damages are a measure of just how the failure to treat him devastated his life, health and military career.

I would urge any former servicemen to read the informative article written by my colleague Richard Scorer for the New Law Journal.

If you are a former serviceman and wish to seek legal advice please feel free to contact our specialist Solicitors on 0800 0384 384 during business hours for free initial advice.

Illness strikes at Tropicana Grand Oasis Resort Hotel

2010-08-27 00:00:00

It has recently come to my attention that there has been an outbreak of sickness at the all-inclusive Tropicana Grand Oasis Resort Hotel. The resort, which is popular with British holidaymakers has 437 rooms and is situated in Sharks Bay, Sharm El Sheikh in Egypt.

Internet postings have revealed the problems at the hotel. Complaints include; raw food served in the hotel restaurant and raw and cooked food being handled together. There are also complaints that the water at the hotel is discoloured.

All of the above problems raise concerns about hygiene at the hotel. These complaints are then coupled with reports that there is a large scale illness outbreak at the hotel and that many tourists are ill with gastroenteritis. Symptoms typically include nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and fever.

Anyone who has travelled to this resort in recent months and suffered illness during their stay should consult their doctor upon return to the UK and keep receipts for any medication purchased together with copies of any written complaints made in resort.

We would be very interested to hear from any holidaymakers that have suffered similar illness.

If you have suffered from food poisoning whilst abroad, then call our specialist litigation solicitors for immediate advice.

Call our travel litigation solicitors on 0800 0384 384 during business hours and a specialist holiday accident, holiday illness or holiday sickness claim solicitor can review your compensation claim for free while you are on the phone. If you prefer you can contact us by e-mail.

More councils turn off speed cameras

2010-08-24 00:00:00

Regular readers of this site may recall that I blogged (03.08.2010) about Oxfordshire Council turning off their speed cameras. Their decision followed the withdrawal of central government funding for the cameras. Wiltshire is now the latest county to follow the lead of Oxfordshire in turning off its speed cameras.

Police and safety campaigners are adamant that cameras do slow traffic and save lives. Chief Constable Mick Giannasi has written to the road safety minister warning that if the cameras are turned off there will be a rise in fatal accidents.

Derbyshire, Somerset, Buckinghamshire, Dorset, Norfolk and Devon and Cornwall are believed to be considering a similar move in response to the governments reduction in this years road safety grant to local authorities.

Ellen Booth the Campaign Officer at Brake, the road safety charity, said that the decisions being made on speed cameras are more about politics and less about the facts. The fact is that speed cameras save lives.

If you have been involved in a road traffic accident involving a speeding driver, Pannone LLP has a team of specialist solicitors and legal advisors who can help. Telephone on 0800 0384 384 during business hours and a claims solicitor will review the circumstances of your accident whilst you are on the phone for free.

Emergency Medical Care in the EU and the Limitations of the EHIC Scheme

2010-08-19 00:00:00

I was very concerned to hear the news of Carrie-Anne Dudbridge who remains in hospital in Corfu following a 20ft fall from her hotel room balcony. I understand that she was on a surprise honeymoon organised by friends and family when the tragic accident occurred. My thoughts go out to her husband and family at this very difficult time.

Unfortunately the couple had not taken out travel insurance for the holiday. Like many English tourists they had assumed that the European Health Insurance Card (EHIC) would cover them fully in the unlikely event that either would be injured whilst on holiday in another European country. Unfortunately this is simply not the case. The EHIC scheme provides the holder with the same level of treatment in an emergency situation as would be available to a resident of that EU country. In Greece, that means the basic treatment that would be provided to a resident of Greece by their state healthcare provider.

It is vitally important that people are aware that the EHIC scheme does not cover any additional costs related to a UK resident being treated in another EU state following an accident. For example, the EHIC scheme does not cover the costs of relatives travelling to that country to be with their injured relative, or their accommodation costs once there. It also does not cover repatriation costs to fly the injured person back to this country for further treatment. The cost of repatriation on a private flight with the necessary medical assistance is often much greater than people would expect. For Carrie-Anne Dudbridge, I understand from reports in the press that a quote of 16,000 has been provided to her family for this service. From my own experience I know that this level of cost for medical repatriation is not uncommon.

The other point people need to be aware of is that you should not assume that the emergency healthcare provided to a resident of another EU state is the same as that provided by the NHS. In many European countries residents are expected to contribute towards the cost of such healthcare, if you receive treatment in a country with this system you will have to pay such a contribution although you may be entitled to reimbursement on return to the UK.

I very much hope that Carrie-Anne Dudbridge is able to return to England as soon as possible to continue her treatment and recovery. I also hope that this tragic case will lead to a greater understanding of the necessity to take out comprehensive travel insurance before you travel and the limitations of the protection afforded by the EHIC scheme.

If you have suffered an injury on holiday or similar accident/illness recently, then we would be very interested to hear from you. If you have suffered from an accident whilst abroad, then call our specialist litigation solicitors for immediate advice.

Call our travel litigation solicitors on 0800 0384 384 during business hours and a specialist holiday accident, holiday illness or holiday sickness claim solicitor can review your compensation claim for free while you are on the phone. If you prefer you can contact us by e-mail.

Double trouble for holidaymakers as Kiss Flights collapses

2010-08-18 00:00:00

Some people have no luck.

Today's BBC story highlights the plight of scores of holidaymakers who having suffered the disappointment of losing holidays booked with the collapsed tour operator Goldtrail earlier this month, have now seen their re-booked holidays being ruined by the demise of Kiss Flights. A double whammy of heartbreak for holidaymakers!

The BBC reports that many of the passengers affected by today's events, are still waiting for refunds from their previous failed trip with Goldtrail, the Greece and Turkey holiday specialists.

Even more worrying is the fact that Kiss Flights is the 13th travel firm to collapse in 2010...so far. The recession has clearly got a grip on the travel industry and holidaymakers should do their uptmost to protect themselves against any further failures.

I have previously blogged about the dangers of adopting a do-it-yourself approach to your holiday and see no harm in repeating my advice, especially in light of today's events.

My blog - "Holiday Russian Roulette" highlights the difficulties holiday makers face if they choose to ignore the traditional route and go it alone. Quite simply if you book your holiday as a "package" you are protected by the powerful legislation that is the Package Travel (etc) Regulations 1992 should things go wrong. You have a direct right of redress against the tour operator should you have an accident or suffer an illness due to the fault of the hotel or other supplier of services. This is not the case if you choose to book each component of your holiday separately i.e your flight with one provider, your hotel with another. If something goes wrong, tough. You are on your own.

Booking a package holiday is possibly more expensive than the DIY route, but taking into consideration the precarious nature of the travel industry at the moment, you must ask yourself - is saving a few pounds really worth the risk?

Call our travel litigation solicitors during business hours and a specialist holiday accident, holiday illness or holiday sickness claim solicitor can review your compensation claim for free while you are on the phone. If you prefer you can contact us by e-mail.

Call 0844 980 1428 now for a free consultation with a Personal Injury Solicitor or Lawyer at Pannone LLP.

Flip Flops, Boots and High Heels - Faulty Shoes Cause Injury

2010-08-18 00:00:00

I wouldn't want to take on the delighful Ms Campbell's claim after famously falling off her vertiginous Vivienne Westwood platforms - after all she was surely aware of the risks she was taking on when she started tottering down the runway - however I am currently acting for a couple of clients who have sustained nasty injuries as a result of defective shoes.

One client sustained a broken elbow when walking along the pavement wearing a perfectly sensible pair of flat Matalan boots. As a decorative feature the boots had a strap which wrapped around the boot and which was fastened with a buckle, however due to an inherent design flaw the strap fell down as my client walked along and tangled itself around her feet causing her to topple over and sustain injury.

Upon inspecting the boots Matalan stated that they had sold thousands of pairs and not had any other complaints however were forced to concede that the design was inherently dangerous and have now admitted liability.

A second claim is due to a pair of flip flops purchased from Next having a totally unsuitable, slippery sole which caused my client to slip and sustain significant soft tissue injury. Next have commendably conceded liability straightaway as it was clear that the soles were both defective and unsuitable for their purpose.

Another similar case which Pannone have pursued involved a client whose heel snapped off her strappy sandals on the first occasion that she wore them and which resulted in her sustaining a broken ankle. My colleague Michael Hardacre successfully pursued the claim against Dolcis and was successful in this widely reported case, recovering 7,000.00 for the unfortunate Claimant.

We ladies frequently abuse our feet through a love of unsuitable and frivolous footwear, but it is an entirely different matter when a serious injury is sustained due to defectively designed or manufactured shoes.

If you believe you have been injured in similar circumstances (Ms Campbell excepted), then please do get in touch with us to investigate whether we can assist with a potential claim for compensation on 0800 0384 384 during business hours and a specialist personal injury lawyer can review your compensation claim for free while you are on the phone.

Hospice gets payout in mesothelioma claim

2010-08-18 00:00:00

As a solicitor who specialises in industrial disease cases such as mesothelioma and asbestosis I know what invaluable work hospices do to care for cancer sufferers and their families. Therefore I was very pleased to read about a landmark claim recently in the news, reported in the Loughborough Echo, where a judge awarded St Joseph's Hospice in Hackney, east London, more than 10,000, plus interest, against a company held liable over the death of one of its patients from asbestos-related lung cancer.

The Defendant company who exposed the victim to asbestos argued that the claim was "not covered by permitted authority" and that the care provided by the hospice "was not provided or charged under a contract between St Joseph's and Mr Wilson".

But the paper reports that Judge Anthony Thornton QC, sitting at the High Court in London, ruled the hospice was entitled to "a reasonable sum" from the company, which he set at 10,021 with interest from the date of Mr Wilson's death. The judge observed the care given to Mr Wilson was "charitable in nature, gratuitous and provided without St Joseph's being under an obligation to provide it".

The paper quotes the judge as saying: "The institutional care was provided because the family members were no longer able to cope and Mr Wilson's condition had deteriorated to such an extent that home care was no longer possible. However, the inpatient care was entirely palliative and was solely directed to making Mr Wilson's few remaining days of life as comfortable and dignified as his declining health allowed."

This is a brilliant result which will give heart to hospices all over the country who provide free care and no doubt are struggling with charitable donations during this time of recession and cut backs. The paper reports that St Joseph's imposed no restrictions on who could receive palliative care and for general philanthropic purposes it operated an open-door, non-charging regime with no obligation being imposed on the patients to contribute to its costs.

Lets hope this judgment opens the door to more landmark claims in the future to help these wonderful organisations with their sterling work caring for sick and terminally ill sufferers.

If you or a member of your family has been diagnosed with an asbestos related disease, such as mesothelioma or asbestosis, call our specialist asbestos solicitors on 0800 0384 384 during business hours and a specialist industrial disease lawyer can review your compensation claim for free while you are on the phone.